Madras High CourtWP(MD)/32733/2025disposed of

Alagarsamy K v. The District Collector

2025-11-17Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :17.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY amd WMP (MD) No.25817 of 2025 K. Alagarsamy ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector Dindigul District Dindigul.

2. The Tahsildar Authoor Taluk Authoor Dindigul District.

... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the Impugned Rejection order issued by the 2nd Respondent vide his proceedings in the Na.Ka.No.2704/2025/S dated 12.09.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the 2nd Respondent to issue Patta with regard to the entire extent of 3.35 cents (1496 Sq.ft) instead of 2.5 cents in Survey No.1006/147 situated at Ayyampalayam Village, Authoor Taluk, Dindigul District on the basis of the petitioners sale deed as Document No.131 of 1992 dated 13.02.1992 and for other reliefs.

1/4

For Petitioner :Mr.J. Lawrance For Respondents :Mr.M.Muthumanikkam Government Advocate

O R D E R

By relying on the extent conveyed in sale deed dated 13.02.1992, the petitioner had applied for rectification of the patta so as to reflect the extent of 3.35 cents (1496 and 1/4 square feet) instead of the extent of about 1 Are reflected in the revenue records. The said request was rejected by order dated 12.09.2025, which is impugned herein.

2. In the impugned order, it is recorded that the petitioner's vendor was issued Patta No.3609 for an extent of 1 Are. It is also recorded that the said extent tallies with the FMB. The request of the petitioner was rejected on that basis.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, contends that the actual area under the possession of the petitioner is 3.35 cents. In effect, purely factual issues are raised by the petitioner. In exercise of discretionary jurisdiction, I am not inclined to interfere with this order. Therefore, by leaving it open to the petitioner to file an appeal before the 2/4

Revenue Divisional Officer, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions is closed. 17.11.2025 NCC :No Internet :Yes Index :No PKN To

1. The District Collector Dindigul District Dindigul.

2. The Tahsildar Authoor Taluk Authoor Dindigul District.

3/4

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

PKN 17.11.2025 4/4